Beyond Academia. On doing Cultural Studies, and Intercultural Practices

DANIEL MATO

Miami

Simposio; Culture as Resource Symposium. University of Miami; 2017

University of Miami

Debates on the institutionalization of Cultural Studies and its political, ethical, and epistemological dimensions were particularly important during the 1990s. As at that time, Cultural Studies was experiencing a significant transnational expansion, involving colleagues and institutions from several European, Asian and Latin American countries, these debates were often associated to the diversity of intellectual genealogies and traditions at stake. Albeit, these differences are/were relevant to understand crucially important political, ethical, and epistemological aspects, privileging that focus of attention often contributed to shade the discussion on those significant dimensions. As George Yúdice properly pointed out (2002), I have had certain degree of responsibility in propelling the discussion towards those differences (Mato 2000, 2003a), even though at that time I was also highlighting the relevance of transnational convergences and dialogues (2001, 2003b). I would like to acknowledge the importance of George Yudice´s argument on that point. Discussing those differences was not irrelevant, but focusing on them, made us to miss some significant political, ethical, and epistemological aspects. What sparked George Yúdice concern regarding my position was a lecture I offered at the Crossroads in Cultural Studies Conference hold in Birmingham in June 2000. Being one of the few plenary lectures my intervention had a significant impact in the debates on the ongoing organizing of the international Association of Cultural Studies. The focus of that lecture of mine was precisely the institutionalization and associated de-politicization of Cultural Studies in the United Sates. My concern in that regard was also motivated by and the amnesia of certain Latin American colleagues that were eager to adopt the Made in USA representations of what they named Latin American Cultural Studies, which in a good deal ignored the importance of clearly politicized pre-existing traditions of intellectual practices in culture and and power in this world region. Moreover I insisted on naming the field as Latin American Intellectual Practices in Culture and Power, as an alternative to the increasingly accepted name of ?Latin American Cultural Studies.? At that time I was proactively promoting that discussion in several scenarios, as I was the chair of both a Section at LASA -the Latin America Studies Association, and a Working Group at CLACSO -the Latin American Council on Social Sciences, and in addition was preparing a conference and an editing a book on Latin American studies and other intellectual practices in culture and power. These focused activities of mine were what George Yúdice took in consideration to argue on my role in highlighting the significance of differences between Latin American and other intellectual traditions in the field. I will try this time to avoid emphasizing on differences between Latin American and other intellectual traditions, to focus specially in some political, ethical, and epistemological dimensions of doing Cultural Studies in and out the academy; or perhaps I would rather say doing Cultural Studies beyond the academy.